Liars

[margrace]

Liar, liar

In an age when text messages and e-mail records can instantly expose untruths and land a fibber in the hot seat, why do people continue to fudge the facts? Siri Agrell reports

SIRI AGRELL

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

March 27, 2008 at 8:51 AM EDT

So you're going to tell a lie.

Before you do, ask yourself the following question: Is there any video footage, transcript, text message, e-mail record or living person that could expose you as a fraud?

[White Doors]

Liar, liar

In an age when text messages and e-mail records can instantly expose untruths and land a fibber in the hot seat, why do people continue to fudge the facts? Siri Agrell reports

SIRI AGRELL

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

March 27, 2008 at 8:51 AM EDT

So you're going to tell a lie.

Before you do, ask yourself the following question: Is there any video footage, transcript, text message, e-mail record or living person that could expose you as a fraud?

?

[RB]

?

it is not lies

they "mis-speak"

[jbg]

Liar, liar

In an age when text messages and e-mail records can instantly expose untruths and land a fibber in the hot seat, why do people continue to fudge the facts? Siri Agrell reports

SIRI AGRELL

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

March 27, 2008 at 8:51 AM EDT

So you're going to tell a lie.

Before you do, ask yourself the following question: Is there any video footage, transcript, text message, e-mail record or living person that could expose you as a fraud?

I am an experienced bankruptcy lawyer, and have learned that even where the truth would be totally acceptable people have a built-in need to lie. For some, the truth is boring. For others, people's need to not only be well-off and comfortable but downright wealthy leads them to need a persona beyond who they really are.

The Wizard of Oz is a perfect example. Some people do take the trouble to try to really find and meet the Wizard and guess what they find; a lot of holus bolus.¹

¹I'd like to read the article so could you provide link?

[charter.rights]

I am an experienced bankruptcy lawyer, and have learned that even where the truth would be totally acceptable people have a built-in need to lie. For some, the truth is boring. For others, people's need to not only be well-off and comfortable but downright wealthy leads them to need a persona beyond who they really are.

The Wizard of Oz is a perfect example. Some people do take the trouble to try to really find and meet the Wizard and guess what they find; a lot of holus bolus.¹

¹I'd like to read the article so could you provide link?

Most people are actors playing roles depending on who they are dealing with - including bankruptcy lawyers. If everyone acted real and truthful there would be no need for lawyers and pimps. Unfortunately ego gets in front of truth.

[jbg]

Most people are actors playing roles depending on who they are dealing with - including bankruptcy lawyers. If everyone acted real and truthful there would be no need for lawyers and pimps. Unfortunately ego gets in front of truth.

Why the need to turn a serious post/comment into an "April Fools" joke?

[eyeball]

Liar, liar

In an age when text messages and e-mail records can instantly expose untruths and land a fibber in the hot seat, why do people continue to fudge the facts? Siri Agrell reports

SIRI AGRELL

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

March 27, 2008 at 8:51 AM EDT

So you're going to tell a lie.

Before you do, ask yourself the following question: Is there any video footage, transcript, text message, e-mail record or living person that could expose you as a fraud?

There certainly should be for any politicians, lobbyists, CEO's, and senior bureaucrats operating in the public's domain.

[M.Dancer]

So much for freedom with free markets then....welcome to the authoritarian big brotheresque socialist state.

[eyeball]

As usual you have Big Brother confused with Little Brother and have equated accountability with socialism, which seems rather peculiar.

In the meantime the free market seems to be flooding the public square with as many video cameras and other surveillance methods to keep an eye on anyone who isn't a politician, lobbyist, CEO, or senior bureaucrat.

[M.Dancer]

As usual you have Big Brother confused with Little Brother and have equated accountability with socialism, which seems rather peculiar.

In the meantime the free market seems to be flooding the public square with as many video cameras and other surveillance methods to keep an eye on anyone who isn't a politician, lobbyist, CEO, or senior bureaucrat.

No I'm equating the loss of privacy and the desire to control the actions of individuals with socialism. We already have accountability. What you want is state sanctioned voyeurism.

Anyone who imagines they have a right to privacy in the public space is an idiot.

[eyeball]

No I'm equating the loss of privacy and the desire to control the actions of individuals with socialism. We already have accountability. What you want is state sanctioned voyeurism.

Anyone who imagines they have a right to privacy in the public space is an idiot.

Hello...I'm talking about politicians, CEO's, and senior bureaucrats who are engaged in their capacity as public servants in the public's domain. You seem to be saying that a penetration of their secrecy, equates to an assault on our privacy, deliberately I suspect. I'm not talking about souveilling people like you and me, unless you're a lobbyist, in which case I can see why you would fear more accountability and try to deflect any attempt to make the public's domain more transparent. Excatly how does their accountability equate with socialism?

We have some accountability, but nowhere near enough at the executive level of society. Invest in more transparency, the purer the better, at the top of society and decency and honesty will trickle down through the rest just like wealth is supposed to except for real. I don't want to control any individual's actions I simply want to protect the public's domain by penetrating the secrecy that surrounds the discussions and actions of the politicians, lobbyists, CEO's, and senior bureaucrats that conduct their business within our domain. What these people do in their private lives is their business, what they do in the public's domain is our business.

Anyone who imagines they have a right to secrecy in the public space must have something to hide or lose, probably both. What you want is state authorized secrecy.

[M.Dancer]

Hello...I'm talking about politicians, CEO's, and senior bureaucrats who are engaged in their capacity as public servants in the public's domain.

Earth to Eyeball....CEOs aren't public servants and don't need or desire your purient attention. What they are are the leaders of private interests and capital pools and are responsible to the shareholders for among other things, maintaining corporate trade secrets which protect the sahreholders interests.

I realise that is too complicated for you too understand...

[AngusThermopyle]

We have some accountability, but nowhere near enough at the executive level of society. Invest in more transparency, the purer the better, at the top of society and decency and honesty will trickle down through the rest just like wealth is supposed to except for real. I don't want to control any individual's actions I simply want to protect the public's domain by penetrating the secrecy that surrounds the discussions and actions of the politicians, lobbyists, CEO's, and senior bureaucrats that conduct their business within our domain. What these people do in their private lives is their business, what they do in the public's domain is our business.

Why should private companies be subject to the scrutiny of politicians? Why should the secret discussions of CEO's be made public? They are not funded by us (well mostly not). If what you want were to happen then in all fairness you and I would be subject to the same degree of intrusion into our affairs.

Perhaps you don't mind your private life being broadcast across the nation but personally I like to keep my personal life to myself.

[M.Dancer]

Why should private companies be subject to the scrutiny of politicians? Why should the secret discussions of CEO's be made public? They are not funded by us (well mostly not). If what you want were to happen then in all fairness you and I would be subject to the same degree of intrusion into our affairs.

Perhaps you don't mind your private life being broadcast across the nation but personally I like to keep my personal life to myself.

Indeed, I know I don't want my confidential business plans and trade secrets open to observation by morons with no concept about how money is made and believe it can't, it can only be redistibuted.....

[guyser]

Why should private companies be subject to the scrutiny of politicians? Why should the secret discussions of CEO's be made public? They are not funded by us (well mostly not).

Maybe eyeball is confused, perhaps he meant publically traded co's. Now that i could agree with. There does seem to be a need to investigate and hold accountable those who trade with our dollars. And while they are at it, recompense the investor for fraudulant acts. I am thinking along the lines of Enron et al.

That cost a lot of little people huge dollars. Dont confuse my desire with speculative trading that is above board but poor risk or sound strategies that bomb.

[M.Dancer]

Maybe eyeball is confused, ....

understatement of the year...